Tuesday, July 8, is election day in Marblehead, when voters will decide whether to uphold or overturn Article 23, a zoning bylaw creating multifamily overlay districts in Marblehead required under the state’s MBTA Communities Act.
Polls will be open from 2 to 8 p.m., with precincts 3-6 voting at Marblehead High School field house, 10 Humphrey St., and precincts 1-2 at Abbot Hall, 188 Washington St. Town Administrator Thatcher Kezer described turnout at two early voting days last week as “steady.”
Town Meeting approved 3A on May 6 by a 951-759 vote, creating overlay districts allowing multifamily housing in three areas of town.
The overlay districts would cover portions of Pleasant Street, areas along Broughton Road and sections of Tioga Way. Combined, these zones could permit development of up to 600 additional housing units to meet state requirements.
The ballot question asks: “Shall the town vote to approve Article 23, establishing zoning overlay districts pursuant to the MBTA Communities Act?”
Attorneys Yael Magen and John DiPiano, both of Marblehead, subsequently filed a successful petition under Marblehead’s 1954 Special Act, triggering the first referendum in the law’s 71-year history.
To overturn Town Meeting’s approval, the “no” side needs an estimated 3,335 votes — representing 20% of all registered voters — and must constitute a majority of votes cast. If turnout is below 20%, the repeal effort automatically fails. If turnout exceeds 40%, the “no” side can win by securing just over half the votes.
In scenarios with mid-range turnout, the math is challenging: at 25% turnout, “no” voters would need about 80% of votes; at 30%, about 67%; and at 35%, just over 57%.
By comparison, only 769 people voted “no” at Town Meeting — meaning the “no” campaign would need to turn out more than four times as many votes in this special election.
The MBTA Communities Act requires cities and towns near public transit to zone for multifamily housing. Superior Court Justice Mark Gildea dismissed a legal challenge to the law June 6.
Angus McQuilken, on behalf of the Marblehead Housing Coalition said the group will “embrace the democratic will of the people of Marblehead” but warned that voting “no” would not nullify state law.
Stay with the Current for complete, up-to-the-minute coverage of the results Tuesday night.
“Defying the law indefinitely is not an option, and voting ‘no’ does not nullify it,” he added. “If we vote ‘no’, the Attorney General has the next word in this conversation, in the form of expensive lawsuits and potentially a zoning plan imposed by the State.”
McQuilken said regardless of the result, the coalition will continue advocating for policies that make Marblehead “more vibrant, livable and welcoming.”
“The Planning Board voted unanimously for this plan. The Finance Committee voted 8-1 for this plan. Town Meeting voted overwhelmingly for this plan,” McQuilken said. “The people who have studied this plan the most have concluded that it is a wise plan.”
The coalition urged frustrated residents to support the measure to end the debate and bring the town into compliance with state law ahead of the July 14 deadline.
“A ‘no’ vote lurches us into uncharted territory, which promises a whole new spate of legal, financial, and political troubles until we finally come into compliance,” the coalition said.
Magen said one reason she supported the referendum was to give residents who attended the first night of Town Meeting but couldn’t return for the second night a chance to vote.
“These elections allow for everyone who wants to participate a chance to voice their vote,” Magen said.
If the “no” side wins, Magen said she would petition the Select Board to file an exemption and negotiate with the state for a lower number of required units.
“Marblehead has a unique landscape with minimum free land and high density compared to other similar communities,” Magen said. “3A will affect us much more than other communities.”
Magen warned that Article 23 “is a mandate that can change the face of Marblehead in the next 10 years.”
“A vote against 3A is a vote for the future of Marblehead,” she said.
